[Bug libstdc++/89991] Complex numbers: Calculation of imaginary part is not correct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89991 --- Comment #3 from t.sprodowski at web dot de --- Octave 4.2.2: ans = 2.6284e-20 + 4.2924e-04i

[Bug rtl-optimization/80960] [7/8/9 Regression] Huge memory use when compiling a very large test case

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80960 --- Comment #20 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Updated timings % gfc6 -c pr80960.f90 -fdefault-integer-8 -O2 -ftime-report ... combiner: 81.12 (55%) usr 1.17 (41%) sys 82.31 (54%) wall 2700699 kB (60%) ggc ... TOTAL

[Bug c++/89995] New: Misleading error message 'this' was not captured for this lambda function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89995 Bug ID: 89995 Summary: Misleading error message 'this' was not captured for this lambda function Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/57262] Optimize bound intrinsics with dim=var for rank one arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57262 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Not convinced, but let me move it to NEW. More than three years later I am still not convince that such nano-optimisation has any interest. What about closing this PR as WONTFIX.

[Bug middle-end/89996] New: [avr] ICE in expand_expr_real_2 with -O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89996 Bug ID: 89996 Summary: [avr] ICE in expand_expr_real_2 with -O3 Product: gcc Version: 8.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug tree-optimization/85459] [8 Regression] Larger code generated from GMP template meta-programming

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85459 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9 Regression] Larger |[8 Regression] Larger code

[Bug fortran/51961] [OOP] ALLOCATE with MOLD= rejects if source-expr has a different rank

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51961 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC|

[Bug c/89985] [9 Regression] Stray notes from OPT_Waddress_of_packed_member with -w

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89985 --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3) > since the issue of calls to inform being done without checking the return > value of warning[_at] first seems to keep coming up, I almost wonder if it's > worth

[Bug c/89985] [9 Regression] Stray notes from OPT_Waddress_of_packed_member with -w

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89985 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/79842] i18n: subword translation in "Can't use the same %smodule"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79842 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/89994] New: [8 Regression] ICE (segfault) in compare_ics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89994 Bug ID: 89994 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE (segfault) in compare_ics Product: gcc Version: 8.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/89994] [8 Regression] ICE (segfault) in compare_ics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89994 Matthias Klose changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code Known to

[Bug fortran/82055] segfault compiling F2003 functionality

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82055 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|segfault compiling F2003|segfault compiling F2003

[Bug fortran/89981] [8/9 Regression] gfortran -pedantic rejects code in 8.3.1 that is accepted with 8.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89981 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig --- Author: tkoenig Date: Sat Apr 6 14:16:01 2019 New Revision: 270182 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270182=gcc=rev Log: 2019-04-06 Thomas Koenig PR fortran/89981 * resolve.c

[Bug fortran/89981] [8 Regression] gfortran -pedantic rejects code in 8.3.1 that is accepted with 8.3.0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89981 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9 Regression] gfortran |[8 Regression] gfortran

[Bug fortran/79842] i18n: subword translation in "Can't use the same %smodule"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79842 --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The patch in comment 4 does not bootstrap: ../../work/gcc/fortran/module.c: In function 'void gfc_use_module(gfc_use_list*)': ../../work/gcc/fortran/module.c:7145:8: error: suggest explicit braces to

[Bug target/88839] [SVE] Poor implementation of blend-like permutes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88839 --- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fix committed to sve-acle-branch: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=2cd1f397ed5a155e74719977823b28777caa8312 Thanks, Prathamesh

[Bug c++/89997] New: Garbled expression in error message with -fconcepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997 Bug ID: 89997 Summary: Garbled expression in error message with -fconcepts Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug rtl-optimization/87763] [9 Regression] aarch64 target testcases fail after r265398

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87763 --- Comment #42 from Segher Boessenkool --- The "movk" failures... This is from insv_1.c: Trying 7, 6 -> 8: 7: r95:DI=0x1d6b 6: r93:DI=r97:DI&0x REG_DEAD r97:DI 8: r94:DI=r93:DI|r95:DI REG_DEAD

[Bug fortran/87352] [7/8/9 Regression] Large stack usage with new gfortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87352 --- Comment #15 from Thomas Koenig --- Author: tkoenig Date: Sat Apr 6 22:10:28 2019 New Revision: 270184 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270184=gcc=rev Log: 2019-04-06 Thomas Koenig PR fortran/87352 * gfortran.h

[Bug c/448] -related issues (C99 issues)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=448 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Target|netbsd, VxWorks, SymbianOS, |netbsd, SymbianOS, LynxOS,